Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Ochsner Journal
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Ochsner Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
Case ReportCASE REPORTS AND CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS
Open Access

Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis in a Patient With Nonportal Hypertensive Ascites

Marc Manzo and Parth Desai
Ochsner Journal March 2022, 22 (1) 100-103; DOI: https://doi.org/10.31486/toj.21.0050
Marc Manzo
Department of Hospital Medicine, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Ochsner Medical Center – West Bank Campus, Gretna, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Parth Desai
Department of Hospital Medicine, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Ochsner Medical Center – West Bank Campus, Gretna, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: parthmdesaido@gmail.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a life-threatening condition classically found as a complication of cirrhotic ascites, but it has rarely been documented in a case of nonportal hypertensive ascites.

Case Report: We report the case of a 54-year-old male with SBP arising from nonportal hypertensive ascites in the setting of end-stage renal disease and restrictive cardiomyopathy, both secondary to primary amyloidosis (AL type, kappa light chain). Peritoneal fluid analysis showed a serum-ascites albumin gradient of 1.1 g/dL and total fluid protein of 3.6 g/dL consistent with nonportal hypertensive etiology. The patient was managed empirically with intravenous ceftriaxone and intravenous albumin. Additional workup was nondiagnostic for other causes of ascites, and the patient was discharged after a 7-day hospital course.

Conclusion: Patients presenting with refractory ascites in the setting of end-stage renal disease, cardiomyopathy, and long-standing immunosuppressive therapy may be at increased risk for SBP despite a high ascitic fluid protein.

Keywords:
  • Amyloidosis
  • ascites
  • cardiomyopathies
  • immunosuppression therapy
  • kidney failure—chronic
  • peritonitis

INTRODUCTION

Ascites is the abnormal accumulation of fluid within the peritoneal cavity and is most commonly caused by cirrhosis. Other etiologies include congestive heart failure, renal disease, malignancy, and infectious diseases.1,2 Ascites is characterized by the peritoneal fluid serum-ascites albumin gradient (SAAG) and total fluid protein level (Table 1). A SAAG in cirrhosis is >1.1 g/dL, indicating a portal hypertensive etiology. Total fluid protein in cirrhosis is <2.5 g/dL. Conversely, in cardiac and nephrogenic causes of ascites, total fluid protein is >2.5 g/dL.1,2

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Peritoneal Fluid Features of Ascites

Cirrhotic ascites is a consequence of portal hypertension. Portal hypertension creates a hyperdynamic circulatory response that causes a reduction in systemic vascular resistance, primarily in the splanchnic arterial circulation.1,2 Antidiuretic hormone and the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inappropriately retain water and salt. The excess volume transudates through the splanchnic capillaries and hepatic sinusoids and subsequently accumulates in the peritoneum.1,2

Noncirrotic causes of ascites are much more uncommon; etiologies include congestive heart failure and end-stage renal disease.3,4 The cause of cardiac ascites is congestive hepatopathy. Because the liver receives up to 25% of cardiac output, any cause of right-sided heart failure can result in elevated central and hepatic venous pressures.3 Elevated pressures cause impaired hepatic venous outflow and congestion, which results in transudation from the hepatic and portal veins.3 Nephrogenic ascites, also known as hemodialysis-associated ascites, is defined as refractory ascites associated with end-stage renal disease without an alternate etiology. Most patients with nephrogenic ascites are on maintenance hemodialysis, but peritoneal dialysis has been recorded as well.4,5 The pathogenesis of nephrogenic ascites is unclear and likely multifactorial. Possible causes are elevated hepatic venous pressures, volume overload, increased peritoneal membrane permeability secondary to uremic toxins, and impaired lymphatic drainage.5,6

The general treatment for ascites is centered around strict volume control with fluid/salt restriction, diuresis, large-volume paracentesis, and discontinuation of medications that reduce renal perfusion, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and beta blockers.6,7 The only definitive long-term treatment for nephrogenic ascites is renal transplantation; however, dialysis is a short-term solution.6,7

One life-threatening complication of ascites is spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), an infection of ascitic fluid without a secondary intra-abdominal source. The pathophysiology of SBP is the translocation of gut bacteria into ascitic fluid, with 75% of SBP arising in patients with cirrhotic ascites.8 The diagnosis is made by an ascitic fluid neutrophil count >250/mm3.7 Management begins with empiric antibiotics—third-generation cephalosporins—that are tailored according to ascitic culture sensitivities. Cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, and ceftazidime have been shown to cover approximately 95% of ascitic and gut flora, with the most common pathogens being Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus.7 In patients with renal dysfunction, ceftriaxone and albumin should be the empiric treatment of choice. Of note, culture-negative ascitic fluid occurs approximately 60% of the time and may present in a clinically similar way to a culture-positive SBP presentation.8 Culture-negative ascitic fluid should be treated empirically with antibiotics, as culture-positive and culture-negative patients have similar mortality rates.8 Providers must maintain a high level of clinical suspicion for SBP even in cases of nonportal hypertensive ascites, as mortality can increase from 10% to 50% if empiric antibiotic treatment is delayed.8

CASE REPORT

A 54-year-old male presented to the emergency department (ED) with abdominal distention and diffuse abdominal pain associated with dyspnea, chills, and orthopnea. The patient had a medical history of primary amyloidosis (AL type, kappa light chain), restrictive cardiomyopathy, end-stage renal disease (on long-term hemodialysis), and refractory ascites. The patient's cardiomyopathy and end-stage renal disease were both complications of his primary amyloidosis. He was previously treated with 4 cycles of CyBorD (cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, dexamethasone) and then transitioned to maintenance bortezomib every 2 weeks.

On arrival at the ED, the patient was afebrile, but vital signs were remarkable for blood pressure 89/50 mmHg, heart rate 108/min, and respiratory distress (respiratory rate 25/min, oxygen saturation 93%). Physical examination revealed a tense distended abdomen without guarding and mild pitting edema of bilateral lower extremities.

Laboratory workup (Table 2) was significant for leukocytosis. Liver chemistry was unremarkable. Brain natriuretic peptide level of >4,900 pg/mL, which is chronically elevated in cardiac amyloidosis, and troponin level ruled out infarction. Electrocardiogram and chest x-ray were negative for acute cardiac or pulmonary processes.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Laboratory Results on Admission

Urgent ultrasound-guided paracentesis drained 7.35 L of amber fluid. Fluid findings revealed polymorphonuclear leukocyte (PMN) count of 3,899 cells/mm3, total fluid protein of 3.6 g/dL, and a SAAG of 1 g/dL, establishing a diagnosis of SBP. The patient was treated empirically with intravenous (IV) ceftriaxone 2 g daily and IV albumin. On day 4 of hospitalization, a second paracentesis was performed because of continued abdominal distension and to assess treatment response. Paracentesis extracted 1.4 L of peritoneal fluid; the analysis reported a PMN count of 2,004 cells/mm3, total fluid protein of 3.6 g/dL, and a SAAG of 1.1 g/dL. Ascitic fluid cultures were negative for bacterial growth, so ceftriaxone was continued. Blood cultures were also negative.

Abdominal computed tomography ruled out secondary causes of peritonitis and was negative for perforation, bowel wall thickening, and suspicious peritoneal lesions. Ultrasound of the liver was negative for cirrhotic features or portal hypertension and demonstrated adequate flow through the hepatic arteries. Echocardiography showed grade III diastolic dysfunction, ejection fraction of 70%, and infiltrative disease consistent with primary amyloidosis. Estimated pulmonary artery systolic pressure was mildly elevated at 19 mmHg, and central venous pressure was 8 mmHg.

After a 7-day hospital course, the patient improved clinically with resolution of his abdominal pain and ascites after paracentesis, IV ceftriaxone, IV albumin, and maintenance hemodialysis. The patient was discharged with prophylactic oral ciprofloxacin 500 mg every 24 hours for 7 days.

When the patient followed up with his primary care provider 2 weeks after discharge, his ascites had resolved. Because of concerns for increasing light chains, the patient was recommended to restart his CyBorD regimen and add daratumumab.

DISCUSSION

For our patient, a definitive diagnosis of nephrogenic ascites or cardiac ascites could not be made. With a total fluid protein level >2.5 g/dL and borderline SAAG of 1 g/dL and 1.1 g/dL, we suspect the pathogenesis was multifactorial. The incidence of nephrogenic ascites has been estimated to be 0.7% to 20% in patients with end-stage renal disease,4 while cardiac ascites has an incidence of 5%.9 Nephrogenic ascites is a diagnosis of exclusion, and portal hypertensive, infectious, and malignant processes must be ruled out. Furthermore, in the setting of cardiac dysfunction, a diagnosis of cardiac ascites cannot be excluded.5

Interestingly, our patient had a total fluid protein level of 3.6 g/dL, which is protective against SBP. Total fluid protein levels >2.5 g/dL are opsonic and generate a robust innate immune response, making an episode of SBP less likely for patients with both cardiac and nephrogenic ascites.10 General risk factors for a first-time episode of SBP are low ascitic protein (<1 g/dL), elevated serum bilirubin, and advanced stages of cirrhosis.11

We speculate that the protective effects of higher protein content were negated by our patient's long-term immunosuppressive therapy. Horn et al reported a similar case, a patient with acute renal transplant rejection that led to ascites complicated by SBP.12 The patient had total fluid protein of 5.1 g/dL. The patient's immunosuppressive regimen consisted of cyclosporin A and prednisone, and the patient's cyclosporine trough at the time of presentation was therapeutic at 100 ng/mL. Horina et al reported a case involving a patient who received chronic hemodialysis for diffuse glomerulonephritis (World Health Organization class IV) secondary to systemic lupus erythematosus.13 The patient had total ascitic fluid protein of 5.2 g/dL. She was reportedly on immunosuppressive therapy prior to beginning renal replacement therapy, but her medication regimen was not described. Similarly, our patient had previously received 4 cycles of CyBorD and was on maintenance bortezomib.

SBP has also been reported in association with cardiac ascites. Canakis et al reported the case of an 85-year-old male with cardiac ascites complicated by SBP with a peritoneal fluid analysis demonstrating a SAAG of 1.9 g/dL and total fluid protein of 3.6 g/dL.9 The patient had systolic dysfunction with an ejection fraction of 35% to 40% with global hypokinesis. The patient was elderly with multiple comorbidities, but no immunosuppressive medication was reported. The Canakis et al report has some resemblance to our case with the primary difference being that our patient had a preserved ejection fraction with severe diastolic dysfunction. These cases are rare but have important consequences because of the high mortality of SBP if the diagnosis is delayed.8

Another risk factor to consider for SBP in patients with cardiac ascites is the gut hypothesis, which states that patients with congestive heart failure and reduced cardiac output develop chronic congestion and intestinal ischemia-reperfusion damage, subsequently leading to intestinal hypoxia, hypercapnia, and local pH changes, all of which are virulence activators for local gastrointestinal microorganisms.14 This type of chronic intestinal damage leads to translocation of the gut microbiome into the ascitic fluid.14 Although our patient had substantial cardiac diastolic dysfunction, we favor immunosuppression and nephrogenic ascites as the patient's major risk factors for SBP. On echocardiography, his central venous pressure was within normal limits at 8 mmHg, ejection fraction was preserved at 70%, and pulmonary artery systolic pressure was only mildly elevated at 19 mmHg. These findings led us to think that congestion was minimal.

One limitation to our case study is that we did not have the full history of our patient's CyBorD regimen. Also, the reporting on cardiac ascites and nephrogenic ascites is limited, and nomenclature is inconsistent. In retrospect, after further review of cardiac ascites, we should have kept in mind the possibility of spontaneous fungal peritonitis (SFP). SFP is less common than SBP but has a higher mortality rate because of late recognition.15,16 SFP occurs primarily in patients who have a history of liver cirrhosis. The reported prevalence is 10% in patients who are critically ill with liver cirrhosis.15 Our patient responded clinically to ceftriaxone, so suspicions were low for SFP.

CONCLUSION

Patients presenting with refractory ascites in the setting of end-stage renal disease, cardiomyopathy, and long-standing immunosuppressive therapy may be at increased risk for SBP despite a high ascitic fluid protein. The pathogenesis is uncertain and considerably rare due to the high protein levels that are protective of the ascitic fluid.

This article meets the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Board of Medical Specialties Maintenance of Certification competencies for Patient Care and Medical Knowledge.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors have no financial or proprietary interest in the subject matter of this article.

Footnotes

  • ↵*Dr Manzo is now affiliated with the Department of Internal Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA. Dr Desai is now affiliated with the Division of Gastroenterology, Tower Health – Reading Hospital, West Reading, PA.

  • ©2022 by the author(s); Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY)

©2022 by the author(s); licensee Ochsner Journal, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode) that permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Bloom S,
    2. Kemp W,
    3. Lubel J
    . Portal hypertension: pathophysiology, diagnosis and management. Intern Med J. 2015;45(1):16-26. doi: 10.1111/imj.12590
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Pedersen JS,
    2. Bendtsen F,
    3. Møller S
    . Management of cirrhotic ascites. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. 2015;6(3):124-137. doi: 10.1177/2040622315580069
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.↵
    1. Fortea JI,
    2. Puente Á,
    3. Cuadrado A,
    4. et al.
    Congestive hepatopathy. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(24):9420. doi: 10.3390/ijms21249420
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Hammond TC,
    2. Takiyyuddin MA
    . Nephrogenic ascites: a poorly understood syndrome. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1994;5(5):1173-1177. doi: 10.1681/ASN.V551173
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Han SH,
    2. Reynolds TB,
    3. Fong TL
    . Nephrogenic ascites. Analysis of 16 cases and review of the literature. Medicine (Baltimore). 1998;77(4):233-245. doi: 10.1097/00005792-199807000-00002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Gunal AI,
    2. Karaca I,
    3. Celiker H,
    4. Ilkay E,
    5. Duman S
    . Strict volume control in the treatment of nephrogenic ascites. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2002;17(7):1248-1251. doi: 10.1093/ndt/17.7.1248
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Biggins SW,
    2. Angeli P,
    3. Garcia-Tsao G,
    4. et al.
    Diagnosis, evaluation, and management of ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and hepatorenal syndrome: 2021 practice guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2021;74(2):1014-1048. doi: 10.1002/hep.31884
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome in cirrhosis. J Hepatol. 2010;53(3):397-417. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2010.05.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Canakis A,
    2. Canakis J,
    3. Lohani M,
    4. Ostrander T
    . Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cardiac ascites: a rare but deadly occurrence. Am J Case Rep. 2019;20:1446-1448. doi: 10.12659/AJCR.915944
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. 10.↵
    1. Runyon BA,
    2. Morrissey RL,
    3. Hoefs JC,
    4. Wyle FA
    . Opsonic activity of human ascitic fluid: a potentially important protective mechanism against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Hepatology. 1985;5(4):634-637. doi: 10.1002/hep.1840050419
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Schwabl P,
    2. Bucsics T,
    3. Soucek K,
    4. et al.
    Risk factors for development of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and subsequent mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites. Liver Int. 2015;35(9):2121-2128. doi: 10.1111/liv.12795
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Horn S,
    2. Holzer H,
    3. Horina JH
    . Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in a patient with nephrogenic ascites during an episode of acute renal transplant rejection. Am J Kidney Dis. 1996;27(3):441-443. doi: 10.1016/s0272-6386(96)90371-6
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Horina JH,
    2. Hammer HF,
    3. Reisinger EC,
    4. Enzinger GF,
    5. Holzer H,
    6. Krejs GJ
    . Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in a hemodialysis patient with systemic lupus erythematosus. Nephron. 1993;65(4):633-635. doi: 10.1159/000187577
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Nagatomo Y,
    2. Tang WH
    . Intersections between microbiome and heart failure: revisiting the gut hypothesis. J Card Fail. 2015;21(12):973-980. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2015.09.017
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Wang Y,
    2. Gandhi S,
    3. Attar BM
    . Spontaneous fungal peritonitis in ascites of cardiac origin. ACG Case Rep J. 2017;4:e42. doi: 10.14309/crj.2017.42
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. 16.↵
    1. Patel D,
    2. Iqbal AM,
    3. Mubarik A,
    4. et al.
    Spontaneous fungal peritonitis as a rare complication of ascites secondary to cardiac cirrhosis: a case report. Am J Case Rep. 2019;20:1526-1529. doi: 10.12659/AJCR.917757
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ochsner Journal: 22 (1)
Ochsner Journal
Vol. 22, Issue 1
Mar 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ochsner Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis in a Patient With Nonportal Hypertensive Ascites
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ochsner Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ochsner Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis in a Patient With Nonportal Hypertensive Ascites
Marc Manzo, Parth Desai
Ochsner Journal Mar 2022, 22 (1) 100-103; DOI: 10.31486/toj.21.0050

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis in a Patient With Nonportal Hypertensive Ascites
Marc Manzo, Parth Desai
Ochsner Journal Mar 2022, 22 (1) 100-103; DOI: 10.31486/toj.21.0050
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • CASE REPORT
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Fatal Case of Burkholderia gladioli Pneumonia in a Patient With COVID-19
  • Solitary Fibrous Tumor of the Umbilical Region in a Pediatric Patient
  • Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Show more CASE REPORTS AND CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Amyloidosis
  • ascites
  • Cardiomyopathies
  • immunosuppression therapy
  • kidney failure—chronic
  • peritonitis

Current Post at the Blog

American Association for the Advancement of Science Surveys Scientists About Article Publishing Charges—And Uncovers More Problems

Our Content

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Featured Contributors
  • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • Archive at PubMed Central

Information & Forms

  • Instructions for Authors
  • Instructions for Reviewers
  • Submission Checklist
  • FAQ
  • License for Publishing-Author Attestation
  • Patient Consent Form
  • Submit a Manuscript

Services & Contacts

  • Permissions
  • Sign up for our electronic table of contents
  • Feedback Form
  • Contact Us

About Us

  • Editorial Board
  • About the Ochsner Journal
  • Ochsner Health
  • University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School
  • Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers

© 2023 Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Powered by HighWire